The Last Jedi Is Facing A Very Vocal Minority

[NuSeC]

Maybe Holdo isn't such a great leader. It is still relevant that in a military scenario, unless the order is unlawful, you follow the order without question. Remember, Poe is a great pilot, but he just got demoted to scrub, so his opinion on the matter is of no consequence.

 

What are you talking about with X-Wings? FO still has far more ships than Resistance has X-wings or other craft. It is a pointless strategy in most cases. FO wouldn't ls ram ships because it is far more cost effective to use lasers, missiles, and bombs.

 

I am convinced that no matter what they would have put on the screen you would have people paying out the nose to support it because it is star wars. Regardless of plot holes, poor story and total disconnect from lore.

 

Only Skywalkers, Kenobi, Yoda, Windu need to train or have trials to be useful and proficient in the force. But this all gets explained away by some dude (Snoke) we also know nothing about. Man, if only Yoda was as wise, could have saved a bunch of people a lot of time.

 

You know what it is? I have figured it out, Rey bought the level 70 boost and does not need any XP to level up. If only such a boost existed when the game/jedi first came out huh?

[AlienEyeTX]

I mean you can fill it however you want but it was poorly thought out and made no sense in light that everyone was just watching all the other ships be destroyed and she trolled him. It was dumb.

 

I don't care about x wings or any other ship at this point. Like I said the 1st order (empire) can use this their own way now. And as far as feasibility. If a ship is made with the sole purpose of flying into another ship, not nearly the resources are needed. And for people to insinuate that it is logically consistent with the story or that nobody ever thought of trying it before is naive. Nobody thought about running a spaceship into another spaceship in space? How ingenious and ground breaking...

 

As far as it being an unreliable tactic, the 1st order (empire) has nearly unlimited resources, they would just use this tactic themselves. I mean they made planet and moon size guns. A ship that just runs into other ships/worlds @ lightspeed should be easy.

 

It is a giant plot hole... among many many more.

 

To be fair, we've seen plenty of kamikaze moves in SW movies... just none at light speed. Maybe there are usually friendly ships in the way. Maybe it isn't quite so destructive with light fighters. I mean, they used the main Resistance cruiser this time and, while it looked impressive, it just broke Snoke's ship... it didn't obliterate it.

 

I still say it isn't a logical strategy for general use.

 

***EDIT***

 

Also, if kamikaze was a preferred tactic, the rebels would have used it consistently after the first time we saw a super star destroyer downed by a kamikaze A-wing (I think it was).

Edited December 27, 2017 by AlienEyeTX

[Leklor]

I am sure this was pointed at someone else...?

 

I am calling you a liar?

 

Correct, I mixed you up with someone else from another topic, same forum avatar.

He was actively insulting several people, you weren't my bad.

 

However, like I said, I am convinced that no matter what they would have put on the screen you would have people paying out the nose to support it because it is star wars. Regardless of plot holes, poor story and total disconnect from lore.

 

And speaking for myself I know I wouldn't.

Taking into account everything in the movie (And seeing it again yesterday) I can safely that what you point out as plot hole, I felt were at worst plot conveniences.

Those aren't errors (That's what a plot hole is, something that makes no sense given the context of the setting, behavior of a character, even common logic), they are just things that you dislike and feel are contrived. And you're right, it's okay for you to feel that they are.

But they're not plot holes.

So please, stop calling them that.

Especially in the case of Holdo where he reaction is completely in line with her character, doubly so when taking into account "Leia: Princess of Alderaan".

The Hyperspace thing needs more explanation but considering Han was aware, as far as ANH, that hyperspacing ships had a mass and could collide with real-space objects, it flows logically that the tactic of hyperspace-ramming ships has been deemed impractical at best, wasteful at worst. Otherwise, we'd have seen it used regularily before. It wasn't, therefore it's not a good "regular" tactic. That's how I see this.

[NuSeC]

Correct, I mixed you up with someone else from another topic, same forum avatar.

He was actively insulting several people, you weren't my bad.

 

 

 

And speaking for myself I know I wouldn't.

Taking into account everything in the movie (And seeing it again yesterday) I can safely that what you point out as plot hole, I felt were at worst plot conveniences.

Those aren't errors (That's what a plot hole is, something that makes no sense given the context of the setting, behavior of a character, even common logic), they are just things that you dislike and feel are contrived. And you're right, it's okay for you to feel that they are.

But they're not plot holes.

So please, stop calling them that.

Especially in the case of Holdo where he reaction is completely in line with her character, doubly so when taking into account "Leia: Princess of Alderaan".

The Hyperspace thing needs more explanation but considering Han was aware, as far as ANH, that hyperspacing ships had a mass and could collide with real-space objects, it flows logically that the tactic of hyperspace-ramming ships has been deemed impractical at best, wasteful at worst. Otherwise, we'd have seen it used regularily before. It wasn't, therefore it's not a good "regular" tactic. That's how I see this.

 

To me, they are plot holes, we will disagree here but that is fine. I don't see Rey, giving what we know of the many many generations of Jedi training other Jedi, the trials, all of that is part of the lore. To me, they mucked it up for the sake of the story. Another thing, to me they are not conductive. As in, Lucas wrote most of the SW stories before a film was even released. Now, we have different directors writing as they go with no real concrete end point already planned prior to the film being made.

 

And again, just reiterating. I respect that people are allowed to like what they want. For me, there were too many things that can not be just explained away.

[Adam_J_K]

To me, they are plot holes, we will disagree here but that is fine.

 

Something is either a plot hole, or it is not. Your perception of the thing doesn't change its nature.

 

AFAIK, hyperspace is another dimension that ships travel through to get to places in our dimension faster, and to reach hyperspace, you've got to go really fast. That's why ships accelerate dramatically when, "jumping to lightspeed."

 

In The Last Jedi, we see a ship collide with another ship while jumping to lightspeed, but it isn't the first time we've seen this. It happened in at the end of Rogue One, when a transport ship bounced off of the Devastator. I think the important question here is, "Why did these two events play out differently?"

 

Maybe it's because the Raddus was larger than the transport. Maybe it's because the transport did it on accident. Maybe the Raddus had a faster hyperdrive. Maybe Vice-Admiral Holdo just got lucky and hit at just the right spot before entering hyperspace where she had maximum velocity.

 

Maybe she only meant to be a distraction, and was planning to bounce off the Supremacy, but hit it while jumping to hyperspace and that tore a hole in reality for a moment and that's why it was so effective. Nothing like a little unplanned rip in the fabric of spacetime to ruin your day.

 

As far as it being an unreliable tactic, the 1st order (empire) has nearly unlimited resources,

 

The USA puts a ridiculous amount of money into military spending (most spending in the world, more than the next 5 countries combined), and we don't have naval tactics designed around ramming other ships. Ramming ships works in the real world and it just isn't done. Wonder why that is???

[NuSeC]

Something is either a plot hole, or it is not. Your perception of the thing doesn't change its nature.

 

AFAIK, hyperspace is another dimension that ships travel through to get to places in our dimension faster, and to reach hyperspace, you've got to go really fast. That's why ships accelerate dramatically when, "jumping to lightspeed."

 

In The Last Jedi, we see a ship collide with another ship while jumping to lightspeed, but it isn't the first time we've seen this. It happened in at the end of Rogue One, when a transport ship bounced off of the Devastator. I think the important question here is, "Why did these two events play out differently?"

 

Maybe it's because the Raddus was larger than the transport. Maybe it's because the transport did it on accident. Maybe the Raddus had a faster hyperdrive. Maybe Vice-Admiral Holdo just got lucky and hit at just the right spot before entering hyperspace where she had maximum velocity.

 

Maybe she only meant to be a distraction, and was planning to bounce off the Supremacy, but hit it while jumping to hyperspace and that tore a hole in reality for a moment and that's why it was so effective. Nothing like a little unplanned rip in the fabric of spacetime to ruin your day.

-) Maybe, you just make it up as you go? And nothing of what you said makes it any less a plot hole.

The USA puts a ridiculous amount of money into military spending (most spending in the world, more than the next 5 countries combined), and we don't have naval tactics designed around ramming other ships. Ramming ships works in the real world and it just isn't done. Wonder why that is???

Wrong.

 

-) The US Navy DOES have tactics based on ramming other ships. This is easily found in the idea of protecting an aircraft carrier. Not to mention WW2... Not just the Navy but other military units around the world have strategies about kamikaze missions. World trade center ring a bell?

-) also, this just touches on the light speed issue, not the many other plot holes that have been pointed out.

 

This is just great

Edited December 28, 2017 by NuSeC

[Khelekin]

Being able to ram things at light speed really makes a mess of the whole SW story. It makes the way the rebelion destroyed the Death Star pointless. In fact, it makes the Death Star pointless. It makes all space combat pointless. Objects at light speed have near infinite mass and thus the amount of energy they carry is just insane. A 1kg projectile travelling at 99% of light speed would have the kinetic energy of the most powerful nuclear bomb mankind has created... times 80. Why build a massive space station to destroy planets when all you need is an x-wing sized object accelerated to near light speed for the same effect?

[Ylliarus]

Being able to ram things at light speed really makes a mess of the whole SW story. It makes the way the rebelion destroyed the Death Star pointless. In fact, it makes the Death Star pointless. It makes all space combat pointless. Objects at light speed have near infinite mass and thus the amount of energy they carry is just insane. A 1kg projectile travelling at 99% of light speed would have the kinetic energy of the most powerful nuclear bomb mankind has created... times 80. Why build a massive space station to destroy planets when all you need is an x-wing sized object accelerated to near light speed for the same effect?

 

Well, in the Legends EU we had a weapon that used hyperspace to fire projectiles across the galaxy and destroyed planets, it was called the Galaxy Gun. There was also an even more absurd superweapon called the Shawken Device that would destroy the planet Shawken and hurl its debris across the universe in hyperspace supposedly destroying the entire universe, here is the link http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Shawken_Device . You could say those two also rendered the Death Star obsolete en useless.

 

The fact Holdo rammed the Supremacy at lightspeed was more and act if desperation than anything else. Because if you wanted to fire a projectile at lightspeed you'd need to install engines on it, a navigation system to be able to make precise calculations, a hyperdrive etc etc. Once you use it as a projectile however it's gone, all of those things gone with it. Not really cost efficient is it? Whereas the Death Star can fire over and over technically and doesn't get obliterated when it is used as a weapon (unless someone fires torpedoes into its exhaust port).

 

A ship can be used to ram something at lightspeed, sure, if there are no other options left. But think of all the things you'd need to produce to be able to have a projectile that can travel at lightspeed. Once you use the object, say the X-Wing, as a projectile all of it is gone and destroyed. It simply isn't efficient to produce navicomputers, engines and hyperdrives for projectiles just to have them be destroyed subsequently. It's more efficient to put those things in warships and transportation vessels, while instead building a battlestation that can fire beams, recharge and fire again without destroying all of itself while being used as a weapon.

 

Also, ramming at lightspeed isn't that absurd at all. You know what's more absurd? That in Legends a sith warship with a faulty hyperdrive managed to shoot itself into the future, 5000 years forward into the time of Luke's academy. I am not joking this really happened: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Harbinger_(Sith_dreadnaught). In essence that makes even more of a mess in the Star Wars universe because you'd just need to sabotage your own hyperdrive and you can travel into the future in Star Wars. I find that more absurd than ramming things at ligthspeed

Edited December 28, 2017 by Ylliarus

[Leklor]

Being able to ram things at light speed really makes a mess of the whole SW story. It makes the way the rebelion destroyed the Death Star pointless. In fact, it makes the Death Star pointless. It makes all space combat pointless. Objects at light speed have near infinite mass and thus the amount of energy they carry is just insane. A 1kg projectile travelling at 99% of light speed would have the kinetic energy of the most powerful nuclear bomb mankind has created... times 80. Why build a massive space station to destroy planets when all you need is an x-wing sized object accelerated to near light speed for the same effect?

 

Why indeed?

Maybe be cause a three-kilometer long cruiser was unable to really destroy the Supremacy which is still dwarfed by the Death Star.

So please, pack your real-world physics, they don't belong in Star Wars and never have (Sorry if it sounds hostile but seriously, the very concept of hyperspace is ******** so don't apply real world logic to it.)

Reading people that argue slamming an hyperspacing X-Wing into the Death Star would have worked makes me cringe. It wouldn't work, TLJ proves that with their scene since we have an idea of how much damage is cause by what.

And that's discounting the concept of "Mass Shadows" that are canon and explain that massive space objects still exert some form of gravity to ships in hyperspace and would pull them out of it.

So, it wouldn't work x2.

[Khelekin]

Well, in the Legends EU we had a weapon that used hyperspace to fire projectiles across the galaxy and destroyed planets. In Legends we also had the Galaxy Gun as a superweapon and many, many, others. You could say all of those also rendered the Death Star obsolete en useless.

 

Thing is you dont need some massive superweapons to do it. All you need is a simple projectile of some sort (doesnt even have to be that big... were talking relativistic speeds here) and an ftl drive.

 

The fact Holdo rammed the Supremacy at lightspeed was more and act if desperation than anything else. Because if you wanted to fire a projectile at lightspeed you'd need to install engines on it, a navigation system to be able to make precise calculations, a hyperdrive etc etc. Once you use it as a projectile however it's gone, all of those things gone with it. Not really cost efficient is it? Whereas the Death Star can fire over and over technically and doesn't get obliterated when it is used as a weapon (unless someone fires torpedoes into its exhaust port).

 

Come now, the DS doesnt fire for free. Are you telling me that a single 'shot' from a Death Star doesnt cost more than putting an ftl drive on... anything that can be used as a projectile (a rock for example which Im pretty sure is a common enough object in space)? I seriously doubt that. The cost of building and maintaining a battle station of such size and complexity should also not be ignored.

 

A ship can be used to ram something at lightspeed, sure, if there are no other options left. But think of all the things you'd need to produce to be able to have a projectile that can travel at lightspeed. Once you use the object, say the X-Wing, as a projectile all of it is gone and destroyed. It simply isn't efficient to produce navicomputers, engines and hyperdrives for projectiles just to have them be destroyed subsequently. It's more efficient to put those things in warships and transportation vessels, while instead building a battletation that can fire beams, recharge and fire again without destroying all of itself while being used as a weapon.

 

I disagree. It IS efficient to put a guiding and propulsion system on a 'missile' which cant be evaded (light speed) that can destroy any ship/station/planed in one hit. Actually I think the inefficient thing to do is to lose squadrons of fighters and pilots trying to take down an object which could be one-shot from a safe distance with minimum fuss. 'Sir, we can take out the Dreadnought with one shot at the cost of half an x-wing' 'No, thats inneficient! Send in our slow-*** bombers and all our fighters. I want to watch some cool dogfights. Pew pew!' 'Yes, sir!'

Edited December 28, 2017 by Khelekin

[Ylliarus]

Why indeed?

Maybe be cause a three-kilometer long cruiser was unable to really destroy the Supremacy which is still dwarfed by the Death Star.

So please, pack your real-world physics, they don't belong in Star Wars and never have (Sorry if it sounds hostile but seriously, the very concept of hyperspace is ******** so don't apply real world logic to it.)

Reading people that argue slamming an hyperspacing X-Wing into the Death Star would have worked makes me cringe. It wouldn't work, TLJ proves that with their scene since we have an idea of how much damage is cause by what.

And that's discounting the concept of "Mass Shadows" that are canon and explain that massive space objects still exert some form of gravity to ships in hyperspace and would pull them out of it.

So, it wouldn't work x2.

 

Very much indeed.

 

Also, it has to be noted that hyperspace is not travelling at lightspeed itself. Hyperspace is actually travelling through a different dimension of existence:

 

"Hyperspace was an alternate dimension that could only be reached by traveling at or faster than the speed of light. Hyperdrives enabled starships to travel through hyperspace lanes across great distances, enabling travel and exploration throughout the galaxy." - Source: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Hyperspace

 

Thus the real-life physics already don't apply in the Star Wars universe. It's why we call it "sci-fi" and not "sci-non-fi".

[Ylliarus]

Thing is you dont need some massive superweapons to do it. All you need is a simple projectile of some sort (doesnt even have to be that big... were talking relativistic speeds here) and an ftl drive.

 

 

 

Come now, the DS doesnt fire for free. Are you telling me that a single 'shot' from a Death Star doesnt cost more than putting an ftl drive on... anything that can be used as a projectile (a rock for example which Im pretty sure is a common enough object in space)? I seriously doubt that. The cost of building and maintaining a battle station of such size and complexity should also not be ignored.

 

 

 

I disagree. It IS efficient to put a guiding and propulsion system on a 'missile' which cant be evaded (light speed) that can destroy any ship/station/planed in one hit. Actually I think the inefficient thing to do is to lose squadrons of fighters and pilots trying to take down an object which could be one-shot from a safe distance with minimum fuss.

 

Amazing. Every word of what you just said was wrong.

 

Remember how Watto told Qui-Gon that it was cheaper to buy a new ship rather than buying a T-14 Hyperdrive Generator? It's not cheap to produce the equipment necessary to have an object be able to travel at lightspeed or hyperspace. Especially if all of that is lost subsequently. I don't know what universe you live in but I see that rather as cost inefficient. Also, a hyperdrive on a rock? To use as a projectile? You seriously believe that is cheap and cost efficient? Do you have any conception of how expensive hyperdrives and such are?

 

Also, as Leklor said, we saw what damage A CAPITAL SHIP did to the Supremacy when it propelled itself into hyperspace in its path. As I said before, hyperspace is not lightspeed per definition, it's travelling through a different dimension by reaching faster than light speeds. If a capital ship did that little damage then what would a lone fighter so against the Death Star? And don't use real life physics in Star Wars please, it's called sci-fi for a reason.

Edited December 28, 2017 by Ylliarus

[Khelekin]

Why indeed?

Maybe be cause a three-kilometer long cruiser was unable to really destroy the Supremacy which is still dwarfed by the Death Star.

So please, pack your real-world physics, they don't belong in Star Wars and never have (Sorry if it sounds hostile but seriously, the very concept of hyperspace is ******** so don't apply real world logic to it.)

Reading people that argue slamming an hyperspacing X-Wing into the Death Star would have worked makes me cringe. It wouldn't work, TLJ proves that with their scene since we have an idea of how much damage is cause by what.

And that's discounting the concept of "Mass Shadows" that are canon and explain that massive space objects still exert some form of gravity to ships in hyperspace and would pull them out of it.

So, it wouldn't work x2.

 

It would work if they decided so. Its all 'space magic' and as we can see they will change rules on a dime depending on the director's whim.

[Ylliarus]

It would work if they decided so. Its all 'space magic' and as we can see they will change rules on a dime depending on the director's whim.

 

Something I found on the internet which explains much of your questions and doubts:

 

First, let's make 2 assumptions:

 

Hyperspace collisions have happened in the past. In general, people know the consequences, and they know it's very messy. ("Ain't like dusting crops, boy!")

 

The rebel military leaders aren't stupid. Admiral Akbar, General Organa, and Vice-Admiral Hondo fully understand what a "Hyperspace Kamikaze" attack would accomplish, and they've simply chosen not to do it until now.

 

Now, speculation on why we haven't seen it before:

 

1. Relative ship size matters. If an X-Wing tried to hyperspace through the Death Star, nothing would happen except the X-Wing blowing up.

 

2. The smaller ship gets disintegrated. There's a serious cost/benefit analysis, and only in a "last resort" situation (like we saw in this movie) does it actually make sense to sacrifice such a big ship in a suicide attack. The ship being "suicided" would need some serious size and shields to get close enough before being destroyed - and then it's gone forever. The First Order probably has enough resources to waste ships, but the Rebels definitely don't.

 

3. It's been done before, and the Empire already knows how to thwart it. General Hux is warned well before the collision that The Raddus is "preparing to go to hyperspace". In his hubris, he ignores the warning, saying "It's empty. They're just trying to draw us off". As soon as General Hux realizes what's happening, they start firing on the ship - it's just too late. If he had been less cocky, he might have heeded his minion's warning and destroyed it (or at least disabled it) before the disaster.

[Khelekin]

Amazing. Every word of what you just said was wrong.

 

Remember how Watto told Qui-Gon that it was cheaper to buy a new ship rather than buying a T-14 Hyperdrive Generator? It's not cheap to produce the equipment necessary to have an object be able to travel at lightspeed or hyperspace. Especially if all of that is lost subsequently. I don't know what universe you live in but I see that rather as cost inefficient. Also, a hyperdrive on a rock? To use as a projectile? You seriously believe that is cheap and cost efficient? Do you have any conception of how expensive hyperdrives and such are?

 

 

If it is efficient to send a fleet of fighters (of which multiple are guaranteed to be lost) equipped with ftl drives into combat then it would be more efficient to just sacrifice one drive for the purpose of destroying a critically vital enemy ship/base.

[Ylliarus]

If it is efficient to send a fleet of fighters (of which multiple are guaranteed to be lost) equipped with ftl drives into combat then it would be more efficient to just sacrifice one drive for the purpose of destroying a critically vital enemy ship/base.

 

A fleet is expected to survive and return. A kamikaze projectile fired at another object in hyperspace is not.

 

Read my above post. Ship sizes matter. If the Raddus only did that much damage and that was an entire capital ship ramming the Supremacy in hyperspace, then what do you expect an X-wing would do?

 

Even the Galaxy Gun that fired projectiles at hyperspace and sublight speeds used particle disintegrator warheads instead of just a rock:

 

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Particle_disintegrator_warhead

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Galaxy_Gun

 

So yes, the concept was there in Legends but even then they had to build an entire battlestation like the Galaxy Gun to be able to fire it AND they had to use projectiles with particle desintigrator warheads to do damage.

Edited December 28, 2017 by Ylliarus

[Ylliarus]

Being able to ram things at light speed really makes a mess of the whole SW story.

 

You know what makes a bigger mess of the whole SW story? This little thing here: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Force_storm_(wormhole)

 

This is the very reason why I am glad that the former EU is now Legends, because many things it introduced were simply insane and utterly absurd.

 

Why build a Death Star, why have fleets of warships, why have an army at your back when Palpatine could just create Dark Side storms through hyperspace wormholes and tear apart anything he wanted?

 

People complain about what The Last Jedi introduced just because they want to hate on it, while Legends EU did much more absurd and insane stuff and they didn't even bat an eyelash.

Edited December 28, 2017 by Ylliarus

[Leklor]

I disagree. It IS efficient to put a guiding and propulsion system on a 'missile' which cant be evaded (light speed) that can destroy any ship/station/planed in one hit.

 

We've already covered that: Hyperspace ramming is NOT a one-shot/one-kill ratio.

 

Considering their relative size, you would have to sacrifice an entire Corellian Blockade Runner to destroy an Imperial Star Destroyer, not an X-Wing. Or at the very least a transport or an Arquiten Cruiser.

If HyperSpace Ramming was not dependant on size then Hera Syndulla going through a station hangar (Opened on both sides) in pseudomotion (The distortion when a ship enters hyperspace) with a U-Wing would have destroyed the whole station, it didn't, just wrecked the hangar itself.

 

We therefore know that a starfighter isn't enough to destroy a whole station, let alone the Death Star or a freaking planet!

Now, considering a First Order Star Destroyer is three times the size of an ISD, do you understand why an X-Wing wouldn't do nearly enough damage?

It's not cost effective, plain and simple, because you need to have at least a light cruiser as your projectile, and if you can build a light cruiser, why make it single use instead of making it reliable starship?

[jarjarloves]

If it is efficient to send a fleet of fighters (of which multiple are guaranteed to be lost) equipped with ftl drives into combat then it would be more efficient to just sacrifice one drive for the purpose of destroying a critically vital enemy ship/base.

 

why don't you think we do this in the real world? We could crash our carriers or destroyers into other ships in WW2. For all the glory Kamakazis got in WW2 they weren't really that effective.

 

to follow up with others have said about Star Wars not being science based. In Empire we watch Han and Leia walk out of the Falcon wearing only breathing masks (with no real air tanks) to shoot at space bats that eat electricity.

 

The very concept of Light sabers break all rules of physics. you have a blade that is not solid... yet acts like a solid is able to deflect blaster shots and other sabers and gives off no heat, yet melts and burns anything it touches.

 

I love science and physics and I love Star Wars its always bothered me that people try to explain Star Wars using science.

 

Star is more Fantasy then it is Sci Fi really. If anything A New Hope is a classical Fantasy story told with Sci Fi aesthetics.

[JediAkemi]

Also, ramming at lightspeed isn't that absurd at all. You know what's more absurd? That in Legends a sith warship with a faulty hyperdrive managed to shoot itself into the future, 5000 years forward into the time of Luke's academy. I am not joking this really happened: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Harbinger_(Sith_dreadnaught). In essence that makes even more of a mess in the Star Wars universe because you'd just need to sabotage your own hyperdrive and you can travel into the future in Star Wars. I find that more absurd than ramming things at ligthspeed

 

That wasn't reliable time travel though. That was relativistic time dilation. If memory serves, a few hours passed for the Harbinger and its crew while they tried to fix it and get back into normal space, while better part of five millennia passed for everyone else. So you're wrong. They didn't "shoot themselves into the future". In any case, that is not one of my preferred books.

[SithKoriandr]

Seeing as how the movie is at a 51% Audience Approval Rating w/ 3.1/5 average rating. I wouldn't call that a vocal minority.

 

I say that as someone who gave the movie a 7/10 rating, that would've been 9/10 if

Luke had a better send off (or just no send off) than he got.

 

 

I think this can show just how much one scene can ruin a movie for one person, as I dropped it 2 points for that one way of handling a character That original 1 star was just for some of the annoying things they did and some bad acting (seriously, Rose was not a good actress people, even if she did had a great line).

[Leklor]

I have issues with the RT score because it seems off to me.

The only two places where the score for TLJ is anywhere close to "bad" are Rotten Tomatoes (51%) and Metacritic (4.7)

If there REALLY was an overall dislike for the movie, the scores would be consistent everywhere but they are not since it's at 7.6 on IMDB and has a Cinemascore of A. Very different from the overly middling ratings on RT and MC.

And the movie wouldn't already be cruising towards an easy billion dollars at the box-office.

Edited December 28, 2017 by Leklor

[jarjarloves]

Seeing as how the movie is at a 51% Audience Approval Rating w/ 3.1/5 average rating. I wouldn't call that a vocal minority.

 

no that's exactly what it is. If it was a majority then the box office would reflect that.

 

 

Using an online poll where users can create mulitple accounts isn't even remotely a reflection of reality. In fact you look at those negative reivews the vast majority are newly created accounts with only TLJ as a review.

 

If it was truely a 51% audience aprovel it woudln't be on track to beat Rogue one and become the second highest grossing Star Wars film of all time. Instead it would be on par with Justice League that managed a 70% audience aprovel but only made 220 mill it's entire life in theaters.

 

if 49% of the audience didn't like it then it wouldn't be getting so many repeat views. The numbers don't lie

 

EDIT also as for Metacritic well... Corey in the House has a 9.6 user rating. That's all you need to know about user generated scores.

 

Look at it this way if it was as hated as you think wouldn't those petitions to get TLJ removed from canon have more then what 25k votes? Really that's probably the most accurate number. about 25k people really disliked it. Which might seem like a lot but when you consider the what? Maybe 100 million people who see the movie that's a very small percent.

Edited December 29, 2017 by jarjarloves

[Ylliarus]

no that's exactly what it is. If it was a majority then the box office would reflect that.

 

 

Using an online poll where users can create mulitple accounts isn't even remotely a reflection of reality. In fact you look at those negative reivews the vast majority are newly created accounts with only TLJ as a review.

 

If it was truely a 51% audience aprovel it woudln't be on track to beat Rogue one and become the second highest grossing Star Wars film of all time. Instead it would be on par with Justice League that managed a 70% audience aprovel but only made 220 mill it's entire life in theaters.

 

if 49% of the audience didn't like it then it wouldn't be getting so many repeat views. The numbers don't lie

 

EDIT also as for Metacritic well... Corey in the House has a 9.6 user rating. That's all you need to know about user generated scores.

 

Look at it this way if it was as hated as you think wouldn't those petitions to get TLJ removed from canon have more then what 25k votes? Really that's probably the most accurate number. about 25k people really disliked it. Which might seem like a lot but when you consider the what? Maybe 100 million people who see the movie that's a very small percent.

 

I couldn't have worded it better myself, I completely 100% agree with you here. And seeing how the negative vocal minority acts here on the forums and other places I am confident they'd go as far as creating dozens of new accounts just to bash the movie and so the rating will appear as if it was worse. Because look at polls beyond that movie score and you will see the exact opposite, majority loving it and a minority hating on it. There where the vocal minority has little to no control we can see the true opinions about the movie.

Edited December 29, 2017 by Ylliarus

[that_Spartan_IV]

Counter argument: stop forcing your opinion that it was a good movie onto me. If I critique something, I get jumped upon like the fans are a pack of hyenas. I have a lot of issues with this movie (I will say however, it was better than The Force Awakens, and less insulting.) Don't tell me I can't point out its flaws.